taxonomy: be important tool understanding

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents discipline
Weight: 0.58
, field
Weight: 0.56
, information
Weight: 0.56
, topic
Weight: 0.56
, structure
Weight: 0.54
Siblings recursion
Weight: 0.32
, computer database
Weight: 0.32
, ontology
Weight: 0.32
, directory
Weight: 0.31
, indexing
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
be important tool understanding 1.00
be important tool better understanding 0.98
give understanding 0.85
give richer understanding 0.78
be important for function 0.78
be about evolutionary relationships useful 0.78
is useful 0.78
is important brainly 0.78
be about relationships useful 0.77
give understanding of novel 0.77

Priors about this statement

Cues

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Joint Necessity Sufficiency Implication Entailment Contradiction Entropy

Evidence

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Clauses

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(ontology, is useful)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(recursion, is useful)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(recursion, is useful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Plausible(recursion, is useful)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(ontology, is useful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(ontology, is useful)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Salient(taxonomy, be important tool understanding)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Salient(taxonomy, be important tool better understanding)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool better understanding)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool better understanding)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(taxonomy, be important tool better understanding)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, is important brainly)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Salient(taxonomy, is important brainly)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(taxonomy, is important brainly)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(taxonomy, is useful)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(taxonomy, is important brainly)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(taxonomy, is useful)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, is useful)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(taxonomy, is useful)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(taxonomy, be important tool understanding)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(recursion, is useful)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(taxonomy, be important tool understanding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(ontology, is useful)